The real purpose of these laws is to provide police, DAs, ADAs and Councilmen access to videos of children being examined in Pediatricians offices. The rest of the business's are simply collateral damage.
It is not just the FBI, but every branch and action of government. Except of course, for those feelgood exploits like cutting a ribbon for the installation of a playground or serving a Thanksgiving meal to the poor.
The mess ship has sailed. At least one company that will go unnamed has blatantly refused to fix known bugs in a lighting system that leaves other systems in the residence wide open to crackers.
I certainly have strong beliefs about never sending a person where you can send an electron (paraphrased from J Edgar Hoover.) But just how much loss of security is voice control worth in the turning on a light? Especially when there are other, safe ways of doing this than by means which expose your digital life?
Sorry to say, but TD has already passed his peak of maturity, and is falling with rapidly increasing jerk (third derivative of position, it is the change is acceleration.) Actually, he is obviously experiencing a rapidly increasing drop (8th derivative,) the mathematical term of jerk probably gets the message across better to those not familiar with calculus.
Right you are. Left and Right (Liberal and Conservative) are as meaningful as sports team names, or red and blue teams in steal the flag. They serve as poles of attraction to which individuals are drawn by assignment or popularity. Once attracted to a pole, the camouflage required to remain in that locale means adopting a "platform." How can anyone in their right mind take on the talking points in any such doctrine? Even the Constitution has its flaws.
I was once described as a libertarian, socialist, strict constructionist. It is an appellation that I am proud of, in that it means that I think for myself rather than follow a butting order of bovines around.
I will certainly agree that for profit prisons provide a key part of the problem, and the difficulties of ex offenders finding a way of making a livelihood. But the problem goes deeper than that. A great part is the use of fear mongering with ridiculous crime (currently at a low) as a means of political pandering.
I hear all too many people claim that crime is at an all time high. That people who commit minor violations should be jailed for life. And that if someone is arrested, they are guilty. I have no idea how the public should be educated, but it needs it desperately.
This is a start, but even with laboratory based testing, there is little assurance of a correct result. There is often significant pressure from the police for a "positive." Sink testing is all too frequent. Some laboratory staff like to play god with other peoples lives. Forensic testing is often slipshod, and does not provide proper quality assurance such as double blind testing.
Perhaps the solution is to make the outcome the outcome of a gladatorial contest between the chairman of the board and the reputed infringers. The title legally required to be assumed by every surviving officer in the line of hierarchy. Said officers never having been permitted to be athletes of any kind as a part of their contractual TOSs.
This would serve two purposes. First it would reduce the number of such cases, and secondly reduce the salary contests for corporate officers. /s
Makes no less sense than making copying a game a felony, and would do great collateral good.
What does HBO use the phrase "Winter is coming for?" If it is for a title, then there is no infringement because titles are no longer required to be unique. If it is not a title, then there can be no confusion.
If they trademark "Winter is coming" can I hold them liable for all the damage done by Winter, the additional cost of heating, clearing snow and the increase in the price of produce? If, as it appears this year that winter is not coming, can snow based resorts sue them for lost profits?
You may see this as a dumb argument. But boycotts have been, and are a legitimate mechanism for changing the behavior of the powerful. Indeed, they are about the only thing that are understood by many who control the generation of what you so generously call "art."
But if you want to bring about change, then it has to be a demonstration of power against power, not whining against power. So far whimpering about copyright and DRM has done nothing utile but increase the span of copyright holders by many-fold. And increase the litigious locus of copyright to include billion dollar suits for the marvelously creative innovation of rounded corners.
It is totally ridiculous to believe that change will be effected through sniveling on a blog. If you want to make a difference, then you will have to demonstrate to the powers that be, that they are going to suffer if they do not change their ways.
If this is important to you, thenyou are going to have to fight for it.
OK, you have done a whole lot of nay saying, but I have yet to hear you come up with any kind of alternative.
Any stronger statement by the the ACLU would likely lead to the attention of Mr Hang_Them_Without_A_Trial. Lower level politicians would also make hay of their opponents being weak on crime. Even though the crime rate is at a low.
While I agree with jury nullification in principle, it is a double edge sword. The cop I mentioned earlier who murdered a citizen who asked to see a nonexistent search warrant was nobilled by nullification in one of the more egregious abuses of the police state.
Between 2003 and 2014 years some 53 US citizens were killed in terrorist incidents. That number includes the perpetrators (https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Oct2015.pdf)
2016 is the first year that numbers of citizens killed are being counted. Many innocent of any violation, misdemeanor or crime, far more killed for no more reason than disobeying a cop. The number of citizens killed is expected to total around 1600. Large numbers of others have been beaten, mutilated, falsely charged and convicted. Yet the authorities and citizens refuse to make police responsible for their crimes.
Yet citizens are terrified of Muslims, but trusting of police. What kind of an answer do you have for this Ahem?
weruious was a typo, but your anger is making you wearisome. It is making you blind to the need for these and stronger jury instructions. That the juror is in the box to determine not only the behavior of the defendant, but the appropriateness of the law. As well as the behavior of the State.
You claim that the jury system is there to protect the citizen from the state, then complain when there are attempts to re-balance the levels of power that currently are overweighted in favor of the state.
Some jury instructions (yes, even for a grand jury) might have led to a better result than what happened. In the following case:
"A North Carolina grand jury chose not to indict a sheriff’s deputy who shot and killed a man after he demanded to see a warrant to search his home last year.
Harnett County sheriff’s deputies banged on John Livingston’s door last November, searching for an assault suspect who was not at the home.
Livingston demanded to see a search warrant, but the deputies had none, so Livingston shut the door in their face.
That prompted deputies to kick in the door where they dragged him out on his porch, placed him facedown, and began beating, tasering and pepper spraying him."